Another Canadian Antisemite
By David Skrbina | The Occidental Observer | September 19, 2025
As a small break from the tedium of the Charlie Kirk fiasco, here’s a little news item from Canada that didn’t quite make its way into the broader MSM. On Monday September 15, CBC Radio broadcast a French-language television program Sur le Terrain (‘On the Ground’), hosted by Christian Latreille, that covered Marco Rubio’s latest visit to Israel. Their correspondent in Washington was a female reporter, Elisa Serret, who has served as a national correspondent for the CBC for over 10 years. By all accounts, she is an experienced and well-respected journalist.
At one point in the program, Latreille asked Serret why Americans “have such difficulty distancing themselves from Israel, even in the most difficult moments”—such as in the midst of an ongoing genocide. She replied:
My understanding, and that of multiple analysts here in the United States, is that it is the Israelis, the Jews, that heavily finance American politics. There is a big machine behind them, making it very difficult for Americans to detach themselves from Israel’s positions. It is really the money here in the United States. The big cities are run by Jews. Hollywood is run by Jews.
Well. What impudence: to speak some truth, live, to a national television audience. Predictably, the Canadian Jewish Lobby jumped all over this incident. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) declared that “antisemitism is absolutely unacceptable” and called for “immediate and unequivocal condemnation from all relevant [Canadian] leaders.” In an online statement, the group said that “Antisemitism is corroding the fabric of society”; they demanded that the CBC “take concrete steps to ensure that neither such comments—nor the systemic issues that enabled them to be aired—are ever allowed again on Canadian airwaves.” The B’nai Brith of Canada said it was “deeply irresponsible and dangerous,” calling her remarks “textbook antisemitic conspiracy theories.” They demanded an on-air retraction stating that the comments were “false, hateful, and unacceptable.”
Also predictably, Canadian authorities immediately caved in to pressure. Writing on X, Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault said “The words used last night were pernicious antisemitic tropes and have absolutely no place on Canadian airwaves.” A few hours later, the CBC released a statement saying that Serret’s analysis “led to stereotypical, antisemitic, false, and harmful allegations against Jewish communities.” Conservative deputy leader and Jewish lesbian Melissa Lantsman called for her to be fired. Serret was, of course, promptly “relieved of her duties until further notice.” The Canadian Jewish Lobby, it seems, has nearly as much power internally as the US Jewish Lobby has here.
We can understand the Lobby’s reaction—it definitely makes things look bad for the Jews. “Antisemitic” (yes, thankfully), “harmful” (yes), “hurtful” (yes)… but “false”? That is, was she wrong? Did Serret speak some actual truth, or was it all just “trope”? Let’s walk through each of her assertions.
First: “Israelis/Jews heavily finance American politics.” This is undeniably true. According to a 2020 report by Jewish researcher Gil Troy, American Jews provide a huge proportion of political donations: around 25% for Republicans and 50% or more for Democrats. Indeed, the Democrats are particularly captive to Jewish money; other sources claim that their Jewish share runs “as much as 60%,” “over 60%,” up to 70% of “large contributions,” and perhaps as high as 80-90% for certain elections.[1] Such figures are surely underestimates, given how much dark money and laundered donations make their way into politicians’ pockets.
But Republicans are obviously not free from such influence. Trump received considerable funding from wealthy Jews, including the likes of Bernie Marcus (deceased), Miriam Adelson (Sheldon Adelson’s wife; Adelson is deceased), Carl Icahn, Paul Singer, Robert Kraft, Steve Witkoff, Howard Lutnik, Jacob Helberg, Bill Ackman, Ron Lauder, and Marc Rowan. Most notably, in the latter phases of last year’s election, Miriam Adelson made good on her pledge of $100 million to Trump’s campaign.
Let there be no doubt: Jews are the dominant donors in American politics for both parties, and this is a key factor underlying the subservient compliance of our elected officials.
Second: “a big machine.” The US Jewish Lobby is indeed a big machine, centered on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC. AIPAC has its own political action committee (the “AIPAC PAC”) to make donations, and its own super-PAC, the United Democracy Project (UDP); jointly, these two components spent at least $125 million in the last election cycle. AIPAC has minders or staff members in the offices of nearly every Congressman, and it works to defeat unfriendly legislators—most recently, Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman. Other influential Jewish groups include the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Council of Presidents (COP), the Union for Reform Judaism (URJ), the Orthodox Union (OU), and the Jewish Agency for Israel (JAFI). Other groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) receive considerable Jewish funding and thus work to serve Jewish interests. Additionally, we have “liberal” Jewish organizations like Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP) and J-Street that work to advance Jewish aims. A big machine indeed.
Third: “very difficult for Americans to detach.” Most Americans, especially the young, are increasingly moving toward anti-Israel and even anti-Jewish views. US approval for Israeli actions in Gaza recently hit a new low of 32%, down from 50% early in the conflict. Only 9% of those 18-34 approve of the actions, showing a notable “detachment” among American youth. A recent poll showed that 30% of Americans believe that “Jews have too much power.” And perhaps most notoriously, a 2023 survey found that 20% of American youth believe that the Holocaust was “a myth.” The American people, especially the youth, do not find it very hard to detach from the Israeli megalith.
American politicians, however, are another story. Having been heavily funded, and even pre-selected, to be pro-Israel and pro-Jewish, Congressmen routinely vote 80%, 90%, even 100% in favor of Jewish interests. Apart from a few renegades in the US House, like Thomas Massie and Rashida Tlaib, Congress is thoroughly unable to detach from Jewish interests. The two major parties, who disagree on nearly every other point, readily find common ground when it comes to Jewish and Israeli concerns.
The only real “detachment” problem in the US today is the one from Jewish money in politics. Excluding such money would be obvious in any rational governmental system. Unfortunately today in the US, we are governed by an irrational system, one in which the process of change is corrupted and blocked by the same money that creates the problem in the first place. In other words, wealthy Jews, who now effectively control Congress and the Executive branch, will naturally stop any efforts to reform the system in such a way that might decrease their power. They control both the system and the means to change the system; this is political corruption beyond belief, and it suggests that only governmental collapse or civil war will improve things.
Fourth: “it is really the money.” Yes, as noted above. American Jews own or control as much as 50% of the $175 trillion in total personal wealth in this country. They comprise half or more of the richest Americans, including the new #1, Larry Ellison, who recently clocked in at $390 billion[2] and is now buying up media. If the 6 million or so Jewish-Americans own or control, say, $90 trillion, this yields a staggering average of $15 million in assets for every Jewish man, woman, and child. The average Jewish family of four thus holds about $60 million in wealth. Little wonder that they can afford such hefty political donations.
Fifth: “the big cities are run by Jews.” Serret has overreached here a bit. Of the 50 largest cities in the US, only three have Jewish mayors: San Francisco (Daniel Lurie), Louisville (Craig Greenberg), and Minneapolis (Jacob Frey). But several other large cities have significant Jewish populations and thus are certainly run in accord with their interests, including New York (10.8% Jewish, for the larger metropolitan area), Miami (8.7%), Philadelphia (6.8%), Boston (5.2%), Los Angeles (4.7%), Washington DC (4.7%), and Baltimore (4.1%). (I would note that, based on empirical and anecdotal evidence, for any demographic unit in which Jews exceed even 1%, they certainly dominate political and economic activities.) Additionally, there are a number of Jewish governors, and they clearly have influence over the major cities in their respective states: Jared Polis (Colorado); J. B. Pritzker (Illinois); Josh Green (Hawaii); Josh Shapiro (Pennsylvania); Josh Stein (North Carolina); and Matt Meyer (Delaware). On the other hand, there are large cities with relatively few Jews, including Indianapolis, Memphis, and Austin. Thus, it is something of a mixed bag, but Jewish interests unquestionably dominate in New York, LA, Miami, DC, Philly, San Francisco, and Boston.
Sixth: “Hollywood is run by Jews.” Nothing more need be said. Actually, it would have been better if Serret had said, “American media is run by Jews”; we can infer that this is what she meant. One need only look at the largest media conglomerates: Disney/ABC, run by Bob Iger, Alan Horn, and Alan Braverman; Warner Discovery, run by David Zaslav; NBC/Universal, run by Mark Lazarus, Bonnie Hammer, and via Comcast, Brian Roberts; and Paramount, run by Shari Redstone. Furthermore, the new Skydance/Paramount corporation will be run by billionaire Larry Ellison’s son, David, and his new management team includes Jeff Shell, Josh Greenstein, and Dana Goldberg. Case closed. This lock on American media, which includes news and entertainment, explains why most Americans are utterly unaware of the situational dominance by Jews. Very little truth slips out; and when it does, as in this case, the censors and “editors” step in to squelch the story and contain the damage.
Elisa Serret is a heroine. We owe her much gratitude for her few seconds of truth-telling on a national media stage. For now, the Jews have black-bagged her, but we can only hope that she reemerges stronger than before—perhaps as a new media star in North America, perhaps as a new, strong voice in defense of truth, honesty, and justice.
David Skrbina, PhD, is a retired professor of philosophy. For more on his work and writings, see www.davidskrbina.com
Notes
[1] Cited in Washington Post (13 Mar 2003, p. A1); Jewish Power in America (2008) by R. Feingold, p. 4; The Hill (30 Mar 2004, p. 1); Passionate Attachment (1992) by Ball and Ball, p. 218—respectively.
[2] Ellison regularly swaps places with Elon Musk, depending on the vagaries of the stock market. If one man owns nearly half a trillion dollars, we can easily see how 6 million Jews might own $80 or $90 trillion.
US Cranks Up Pressure on India for Refusing to Kneel
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – September 19, 2025
The US has announced it will withdraw the sanctions waiver granted for Iran’s Chabahar Port, which is being developed by India. The port holds strategic importance for both Tehran and New Delhi. Tehran University professor Mohammad Marandi explains the move.
The US is pursuing two objectives by imposing sanctions related to India’s involvement in Chabahar Port, Tehran University professor Mohammad Marandi tells Sputnik.
- First, it seeks to cut off the North-South Transport Corridor and break the link between India and Russia that goes through Iran.
- Second, it cannot reconcile with the fact that Indian PM Narendra Modi didn’t cave in despite tariffs and is now raising the stakes.
“They are trying to force the Indian government to do as they wish. And this is part of that process.”
The US’ intimidation of Russia, Iran, and India is pushing them to unite on solutions beyond US control, according to Marandi.
“They create an incentive for countries to work together and exclude the United States. It is US policy that has effectively made BRICS what it is today. It is US policy that has made the Shanghai Cooperation Organization what it is today. It is their behavior, their lawless behavior, using sanctions as a weapon, using tariffs as a weapon, using financial institutions and the US dollar as a weapon.”
The US wants full control, and they see the Global South on the rise, and they increasingly become irritated, and they behave increasingly irrational in order to preserve that control, according to the pundit.
So what’s the smart play for Russia, Iran, and India now? “To speed in the process of developing the North-South Transport Corridor and developing the Chabahar Port,” Marandi believes.
Donald Trump corrects Victor Hugo: “Those who live are those who surrender”
By Lama El Horr – New Eastern Outlook – September 20, 2025
The torment that Washington and its satellites inflict on the peoples of the world is so outrageous that it reveals the disarray of the supremacist bloc, which seems to be playing its final card: The resuscitation of a wrecked Empire.
This playbook for restoring fallen hegemony consists of “negotiating” with Beijing through a means of coercion dear to Washington: blackmail. This is done by orchestrating, directly or through proxies, state terrorism of unbridled savagery in every corner of the world where the supremacy of the Euro-Atlantic oligarchy is threatened. In other words, in every corner of the world.
The ensuing funeral ceremonies, also orchestrated by the Axis of the Fallen Hegemon, aim to impose as an irreversible reality the losses of territory, fundamental rights, and power that these destructions and killings are supposed to inflict on the BRICS, the global South, and, of course, China.
“Give me the moon,” Trump asks Xi
Observing the conflagration of conflicts surrounding China, there is no doubt that Washington has raised its level of aggression a notch. The nature of the crises encircling Chinese territory indicates that the US administration has moved from “courteous” blackmail to “martial” blackmail.
“Courteous” blackmail is a traditional coercive tool used by Washington. It might look something like this: “China will be able to strengthen its cooperation with the European Union if it renounces buying Russian energy,” and aims, in this case, to kill two birds with one stone, i.e., to subjugate both Beijing and Moscow.
But this type of blackmail also manifests itself in more ambiguous ways: this is the case with Trump’s announcement of an agreement with Armenia, which has reportedly ceded the development and management of the Zangezur corridor to Washington for a period of 99 years. It goes without saying that such an agreement, if confirmed, can only arouse the fears of Beijing and Moscow and the categorical rejection of Tehran, since it leaves open the threat of an American presence in the South Caucasus. Admittedly, this may be a warning to Beijing and Moscow regarding their security collaboration with Iran: “If you strengthen Tehran’s defense capabilities against Israel, we will deploy troops between Armenia and Iran.” But it may also be that Washington has drawn a parallel with South America: “If China goes ahead with the bio-oceanic rail corridor project, which is supposed to link Brazil to the port of Chancay via Bolivia, there will be a NATO presence on Iran’s northwestern borders”—with all the security implications that such a deployment would entail for Iran, for the North-South corridor, and for the BRI network in Central Asia.
When this “polite” blackmail fails to achieve the set objective, Washington changes its modus operandi. Most recently, for example, Trump asked his satellites to outsource pressure against Beijing: “The G7/NATO/EU bloc must impose sanctions on China and India to force them to turn their backs on Russia.”
But the American modus operandi can also involve resorting to “martial” blackmail. This type of blackmail is more complex than the previous one. While it also involves coercion, it relies on brute force, and it is not always easy to discern the actors or their true level of involvement.
Suddenly, a succession of violent events occurs in more or less strategic areas, which seem to reshuffle the cards of the regional geopolitical chessboard. This is the case of the countless military assaults in West Asia—Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iran, and Qatar. It is also the case, in South and Southeast Asia, of the India/Pakistan or Cambodia/Thailand conflict; of the declaration of martial law by former President Yoon in South Korea; of the color revolutions in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Nepal; of the sporadic riots in Mongolia; of the war of attrition in Myanmar; or of the insurrection in Indonesia, a member of the BRICS, on the eve of the Tianjin summit.
From these upheavals, in which Washington’s involvement through regional and local channels has been widely demonstrated (see the work of Brian Berletic), Washington’s ulterior motives become apparent. Although the terms of this “martial” blackmail are never fully acknowledged, it is easy to guess its content:
- If you ostracize the dollar in your trade with the BRICS and Africa, we will undermine the BRI infrastructure all around your borders;
- Give us shares in your strategic companies, or we will escalate the trade war against Chinese technology and the maritime industry;
- We demand the lion’s share of the New Polar Silk Road, or failing that, we will form a military alliance with Somaliland and Taiwan;
- Stay away from South America and Venezuela, or we will provoke “incidents” on your borders, like in Qatar and Poland, to strengthen the defenses of the countries hosting our military bases.
And so on. These muscular blackmails—in this case, fictions, even if they are inspired by reality—are based on objectives so extreme that they are completely out of reach. They therefore resemble far-fetched threats. Yet, the Axis of the Fallen Hegemon continues to resort to these methods of intimidation, no doubt because they provide it with an excellent pretext to pursue its real objective, which is to intensify hostilities against China.
The objective, in fact, is not the resolution of crises, but their intensification, the Atlantic bloc being convinced that the spread of chaos is the only means within its reach to restore its supremacy. Moreover, the United States is all the less inclined to renounce subjugation by war, or “peace through strength,” as it demonstrates daily through its Israeli clone, its true ambition: to annihilate any desire for diplomacy – even if it means bombing the place where the negotiations are to be held.
For Washington, mourning must precede death
In the midst of these hostilities, it is important not to lose sight of the ultimate goal of the Empire in its death throes: to shift toward a fait accompli by decreeing the death of struggles that are still ongoing. The objective is therefore to push China—and, with it, the rest of the world—into confusing the destruction and killings caused by Atlanticist savagery with defeat.
Clearly, the imperialist bloc is going through a phase of such acute megalomania that it is incapable of making rational decisions. The slightest sign of life from its geopolitical adversaries is perceived as an existential threat. One need only look at the unspeakable abominations that torment the Palestinian people, and that torment us all, to realize how worrying it is to leave the fate of humanity in the crime-hungry hands of the Axis of the Fallen Hegemon.
Under these circumstances, it is up to China, the BRICS, and the Global South to restore what can be restored of human dignity, since “Those who live are those who struggle.”
Lama El Horr, PhD, is the Founding Editor of China Beyond the Wall. She is a geopolitical consultant and analyst specializing in Chinese foreign policy and geopolitics
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
UN Security Council votes to reimpose nuclear sanctions on Iran
Al Mayadeen | September 19, 2025
The United Nations Security Council voted on Friday to reimpose nuclear sanctions on Iran, citing its alleged violations of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
The move, driven by Britain, France, and Germany, has sparked sharp criticism from Russia, China, and Iran, highlighting deepening divisions within the international community over the future of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
The three European signatories to the JCPOA called for the activation of the snapback mechanism, falsely claiming that Iran had breached commitments made under the 2015 deal, which was designed to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities.
The European powers alleged that Iran’s advancements in uranium enrichment and reduced cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) constitute material violations of the agreement.
Iran, Russia, and China push back
In response, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran had presented a “fair and balanced” proposal to European nations aimed at preventing the reimposition of sanctions.
Russia’s UN Ambassador, Vasily Nebenzia, rejected the European-led move, saying, “There are no grounds for reinstating UN sanctions on Iran.” He emphasized that the E3’s push for snapback sanctions has no legal authority and affirmed that Moscow would not recognize it.
Russia also called on Security Council members to support a joint Russian-Chinese draft resolution on Iran, offering an alternative diplomatic track to avoid escalation.
China’s envoy emphasized that pressure on Iran must stop and urged Tehran to reaffirm the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, noting Iran’s declared willingness to cooperate.
Iran maintains that its nuclear program remains peaceful and has accused Western powers of double standards and bad faith. Chinese Ambassador to the UN echoed this stance, stating, “It was the United States that withdrew from the agreement, attacked Iran militarily, and disrupted negotiations.”
China’s envoy also called on the European trio to immediately withdraw their notifications to reinstate sanctions, stressing that “pressure is not the solution.”
Snapback could nullify Cairo agreement
Al Mayadeen’s sources warned on Thursday that activating the snapback sanctions mechanism would nullify the Cairo Agreement and end cooperation between the IAEA and Tehran.
This would prevent international inspectors from accessing sensitive facilities, escalating the standoff even further.
According to the sources, the diplomatic window with Iran remains open, but indicators point to the potential activation of the snapback sanctions mechanism. They argued this is largely because Washington is steering the European Troika in the talks.
The sources warned that Washington is expected to call on Tehran to resume negotiations after activating the snapback mechanism, aiming to impose its conditions from what it perceives as a position of strength. They described this approach as a serious miscalculation of Iran’s stance and the way Tehran would respond.
Trump Is Preparing a $6 Billion Arms Package for Israel
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | September 19, 2025
The White House informed Congress that it is preparing a massive arms sale to Israel, including attack helicopters and military vehicles. The weapons will be paid for with US military aid.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the total value of the weapons deal is $6 billion. The sale is $3.8 billion for 30 AH-64 Apache helicopters and $1.9 billion deal for 3,250 infantry assault vehicles.
Washington will pay for the arms with foreign military financing. The US provides Israel with at least $3.8 billion in military aid annually. Washington boosted assistance to Tel Aviv following the October 7 Hamas attack. In the first year of the Israeli onslaught in Gaza, the US sent Israel nearly $18 billion in aid. The weapons will begin arriving in Israel in two to three years.
The report of the package follows Israel’s attempt to assassinate Hamas leadership in Qatar. The strikes angered Doha, a major non-NATO US ally. Qatar has also committed to investing $1 trillion in the US economy and gifted Trump a luxury aircraft.
Additionally, the assassination attempt prevented Trump from initiating talks to end the war in Gaza and free the Israeli hostages. The strike occurred as the Hamas leadership was meeting to discuss a proposal sent by Trump. Qatar said the attempted assassination ended any chances of reaching a hostage agreement.
The White House has pushed Congressional leadership to endorse the sale even after the Israeli strike in Qatar.
Israel is in the process of ethnically cleansing Palestinians from Gaza. The onslaught has primarily been conducted by Israel using American weapons. A large number of civilians have been killed by Israeli forces. Additionally, an Israeli siege of Gaza has created a famine, and hundreds of Palestinians have starved to death.
Since taking office, Trump has approved multiple arms sales to Israel, including a sale of $3 billion in bombs.
Bernie Sanders Is A Ghoulish Zionist
By Caitlin Johnstone | September 18, 2025
Bernie Sanders finally issued a statement acknowledging the indisputable fact that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza after two years of adamantly refusing to do so. The statement begins as follows:
“Hamas, a terrorist organization, began this war with its brutal attack on October 7, 2023, which killed 1,200 innocent people and took 250 hostages. Israel, as any other country, had a right to defend itself from Hamas.
But,”
Dude goes two years refusing to call a genocide a genocide, then issues a statement which begins by placing blame for the genocide on the victims of said genocide. He also lumps the hundreds of IDF troops slain in the attack in with “innocent people”, ignores the large percentage of the death toll that would have been killed by Israeli troops under the Hannibal Directive, and babbles about Israel’s “right to defend itself” against an occupied population.
The rest of the statement is standard liberal Zionist fare, acknowledging the horror of the situation in Gaza while blaming it all on Benjamin Netanyahu and not the murderous apartheid state which would be doing what it’s doing with or without Netanyahu. It’s just progressive-sounding Israel apologia accompanied by a denunciation driven by the inability to escape finally calling this thing what it is.
This is the face of what passes for the “left” in modern US politics. Absolutely ghoulish.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich described Gaza as a “real estate bonanza” on Wednesday, saying Israel is in talks with the United States negotiating how the two countries will divide up the enclave.
“We are checking how this becomes a real estate bonanza — I’m not joking — and pays for itself,” Smotrich said, adding, “I’ve begun negotiations with the Americans, and I’m saying this seriously, because we paid a lot of money for this war. We need to work out how we share percentages on the land. The demolition phase, the first stage of urban renewal, we’ve already done. Now we need to build.”
It’s absolutely incredible how often Smotrich and his buddy Itamar Ben-Gvir will just come out and admit that Israel is doing the thing everyone says it’s doing. If this information had come out as a WikiLeaks drop or something it would have been a bombshell revelation, and this guy is right here just bloody saying it.
There’s another report from Haaretz about the horrific things Israeli soldiers say they’ve been doing to civilians in Gaza, including descriptions of the murders of children.
Whenever I read these accounts I can’t help thinking about how there are westerners joining the IDF to participate in this genocide. People travel to Israel to massacre civilians and then fly back home to their real countries and resume their lives as though nothing happened, like they went backpacking in Europe or something. And now they walk among us in our communities, and we’re supposed to be fine with it.
❖
Netanyahu says he has been invited to visit with President Trump for the fourth time this year. At this point they should just save on jet fuel and move him into a room in the White House.
❖
Trump is repeatedly bombing civilian vessels under the ridiculous justification that drug traffickers are “terrorists”, without even providing evidence that they are drug traffickers. Trump has now admitted to the US bombing three Venezuelan boats on these completely evidence-free grounds.
When Yemen was attacking ships to enforce a blockade against a genocide, Trump declared them all terrorists and massacred hundreds of civilians. Now Trump is attacking civilian boats and calling them the terrorists.
❖
Ask a scientist when the universe began and they’ll tell you 13.8 billion years ago.
Ask a Young Earth creationist when the universe began and they’ll tell you six thousand years ago.
Ask a Zionist when the universe began and they’ll tell you October 7, 2023.
US foreign affairs committee approves expansion of secretive arms stockpile for Israel
The Cradle | September 19, 2025
The US House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) on 19 September voted 27-24 to approve the State Department Reauthorization bill (H.R. 5300), which, among other provisions, permits unlimited transfers of US arms to a special Israel-based stockpile in the next fiscal year.
“This bill is not just a reform for today, it is a lasting framework that will strengthen the State Department and benefit every commander-in-chief who follows,” HFAC Chairman and former Israeli army soldier Brian Mast said following the vote.
Hidden deep within the State Department funding bill is a provision that calls for repealing oversight controls on “defense articles” transferred to the War Reserve Stock for Allies-Israel (WRSA-I) – a US “emergency” stockpile that Tel Aviv has been significantly relying on since the start of its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.
“[This is] the least transparent mechanism of providing arms to Israel,” former State Department official Josh Paul told Responsible Statecraft earlier this week.
In December 2023, Paul told The Guardian that Washington was dipping into WRSA-I to restock quickly-depleting munitions Israel has kept dropping inside the Gaza Strip.
“We sort of retroactively build a foreign military sales case, which may or may not need to be notified to Congress, depending on what they took and what quantities […] There’s none of the conventional arms transfer policy review that would normally happen […] Essentially, it’s take what you can and we’ll sort it out later,” Paul said at the time.
Created in the 1980s to supply the US military in case of a regional war, the WRSA-I is the largest node in a global network of US weapons caches. Its full contents are not publicly disclosed.
In August, an investigation by the Department of War’s Office of the Inspector General found that “the Army, Navy, and Air Force appointed officials to account for WRSA-I inventory, but those officials did not consistently comply with property accountability requirements.”
“In addition, the DoD OIG found that Service officials did not conduct all required inventories between FY 2022 and FY 2024,” the report highlights.
By 2024, former US president Joe Biden’s administration had temporarily lifted restrictions on the value and type of US weapons transferred to WRSA-I each year. It also bypassed transparency rules by splitting up larger transfers into smaller packages that fell under the $25 million threshold, which would have required notifying Congress.
H.R. 5300 seeks to build atop those provisions to reduce congressional oversight further and allow Israel unrestricted access to the strategic stockpile.
Since October 2023, Israel has acquired a vast amount of US-made weapons from WRSA-I, fueling what experts describe as the most intense bombing campaign of the 21st century.
HFAC members approved the State Department funding bill just days after an official UN commission of inquiry determined Israel is violating the genocide convention in Gaza.
“The Commission concludes that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have the genocidal intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip,” the report found.
US vetoes UN Security Council resolution demanding Gaza ceasefire
Press TV – September 18, 2025
The United States has exercised its veto power to block a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, marking the sixth such veto since the onset of the genocide nearly two years ago.
The resolution was drafted by the Council’s ten non-permanent members—Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama, Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and Somalia—and was backed by 14 of 15 council members. The US vetoed it on Thursday.
The resolution demanded the unrestricted entry and distribution of humanitarian aid into Gaza and emphasized the restoration of essential services amid a confirmed famine and escalating military operations.
The resolution urged all parties to comply with the ceasefire and called for the safe, unhindered delivery of aid by the UN and its partners, in accordance with international humanitarian law and principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence.
It further stressed the need to lift all Israeli restrictions on aid and restore vital services across the territory.
Speaking on behalf of the sponsoring nations before the vote, Denmark’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Christina Markus Lassen, highlighted the dire humanitarian crisis driving the initiative. “We represent the will and expectations of the General Assembly members who elected us,” she said. “The catastrophic situation in Gaza is what drives us to act today.”
After the veto, Lassen added, “Even though this resolution was not adopted today… 14 members of this Council have sent a clear message. We want to see an immediate and lasting ceasefire, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, and the urgent lifting of all restrictions on humanitarian aid.”
The Republic of Korea’s ambassador, Sangjin Kim, who holds the rotating presidency of the Security Council, noted the historic significance of the session.
“This meeting marked the 10,000th session in the Council’s history,” he said, also pointing to its coincidence with the 80th anniversary of the United Nations’ founding and the eve of the General Assembly’s high-level week.
He urged members to honor these milestones by fulfilling the Council’s mandate to maintain international peace and security.
US representative Morgan Ortagus described the resolution as “unacceptable,” arguing it failed to condemn Hamas or acknowledge Israel’s right to self-defense.
“Hamas is responsible for starting and continuing this war,” Ortagus stated. “Israel has accepted the proposed terms that would end the war, but Hamas continues to reject them. This war could end today if Hamas freed the hostages and laid down its arms.”
The veto has drawn sharp criticism internationally, with many accusing the US of enabling the ongoing genocide.
Palestinian advocates and human rights observers on social media platforms labeled the action as “complicit in devastation” and a “green light for continuation of crimes,” calling for alternative measures through the UN General Assembly.
Others highlighted the US’s history of shielding Israel, noting this as the 43rd veto on measures against Israel.
Since the Israeli regime launched its genocidal campaign in Gaza on October 7, 2023, it has killed 65,062 people and wounded 165,697, most of them women and children.
US withdraws waiver for Iran’s Chabahar port, hitting India’s investment
Press TV – September 19, 2025
The United States has revoked the sanctions waiver for Iran’s Chabahar port, threatening India’s multi-million-dollar investment in the strategic project amid straining ties between Washington and New Delhi.
The White House announced on Thursday that the exemption, in place since 2018, will end on September 29.
The waiver had allowed India to develop the Shahid Beheshti terminal at Chabahar, seen as a key gateway to Afghanistan and Central Asia. With its withdrawal, entities involved in the project may now face penalties.
US State Department spokesperson Thomas Pigott said the decision was consistent with the Trump administration’s so-called “maximum pressure” policy. He said that the revocation means any person or company engaged in the port’s operation could be exposed to sanctions.
Located in Chabahar, the port gives India access to Afghanistan and beyond, while also feeding into larger connectivity schemes such as the International North-South Transport Corridor.
India has already provided equipment worth $25 million, shipped food supplies through the port, and, in May 2024, signed a 10-year agreement to operate it. Under that deal, India pledged $120 million in investment and offered an additional $250 million credit line for infrastructure upgrades.
The waiver was originally granted in recognition of the port’s importance for stabilizing Afghanistan and facilitating humanitarian shipments.
Iran, meanwhile, has long slammed Washington’s reliance on sanctions. Officials in Tehran describe the approach as an “addiction” that has persisted since the 1979 revolution, with various Iranian entities repeatedly targeted under shifting pretexts.
Meanwhile, the sanction comes as tensions between New Delhi and Washington have already been rising under the Trump administration. Earlier this year, the White House imposed 50 percent tariffs on Indian goods, doubling an earlier rate.
Trump justified the move by accusing India of indirectly financing Russia’s war in Ukraine through oil purchases. The tariffs, which came into force in August, now cover most Indian exports to the US.
The measures hit at a time when bilateral trade stood at more than $87 billion, making India one of America’s largest partners. Experts warn the duties could shrink India’s exports to the US to nearly half within two years.
New Delhi has condemned the tariffs as “unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable,” and signaled a stronger tilt toward Moscow and Beijing.
Bipartisan Push in Congress to Weaken Section 230, Expand Online Surveillance, and Increase Platform Liability
Calls for platform accountability came with few answers about who decides what speech is acceptable

Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | September 18, 2025
During this week’s testimony before both chambers of Congress, FBI Director Kash Patel and several lawmakers made a concerted push to weaken protections for online platforms, advance surveillance partnerships, and promote government intervention in digital speech spaces.
The hearings revealed a rare bipartisan consensus around dismantling Section 230 and tightening control over how people interact and communicate online.
In the Senate, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham opened his questioning by linking online platforms to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, then repeatedly pressed Patel on whether the internet was a breeding ground for radicalization and crime.
Throughout their exchange, Graham blurred the lines between criminal behavior, such as grooming or inciting violence, and broad categories like bullying.
“Is there any law that can shut down one of these sites? For bullying children or allowing sexual predators on the site,” Graham asked.
He repeatedly implied that websites hosting objectionable content should be held legally responsible, asking, “Would you advocate a sunsetting of Section 230 to bring more liability to the companies who send this stuff out?”
Patel replied, “I’ve advocated for that for years.”
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is a legal provision that protects online platforms from being held liable for content posted by their users.
It allows websites, forums, and social media services to host a wide range of speech without being treated as the publisher of that content. If Section 230 were repealed or weakened, platforms would face significant legal risk for everything users say or share.
This could push companies to aggressively censor user content to avoid lawsuits, leading to broader suppression of speech, fewer places for open dialogue, and less room for dissenting or controversial viewpoints online.
When Graham demanded action against platforms that allow bullying or grooming, Patel suggested that platforms cannot be sued under current law, adding that the explosion of AI-generated abusive material had worsened the problem.
Note that Section 230 does not give platforms immunity from federal criminal law. If a website is knowingly hosting or involved in illegal content, such as child exploitation, terrorism, or sex trafficking, it can already be held criminally liable under existing statutes.
Patel called the situation a “public health hazard” and stated, “I think not only are some of these sites designed to be addictive, unfortunately, the reality is some of these sites are designed to generate income, and many people are generating income based on this illegal trade.”
The hearing offered no engagement with the consequences of gutting Section 230. Instead, there was a clear push to strip away those protections in the name of safety.
Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat, echoed that sentiment. “For years I have supported repealing Section 230,” she said, arguing that the law is outdated and was crafted for a different era.
While she prefaced her comments by claiming to oppose censorship, her solution was the same as Graham’s: eliminate legal protections for platforms to create a “better environment online.”
Klobuchar veered into broader political territory, citing a wave of threats and violence targeting lawmakers.
She asked Patel to commit to conveying her concerns to the White House and emphasized a need to “move forward” on both speech laws and gun control measures.
Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn seized the opportunity to promote the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).
KOSA is a proposed law that presents itself as a measure to protect children but would fundamentally alter the structure of the internet by encouraging surveillance, forced identity verification, and government-influenced content moderation.
While the bill mandates that platforms shield minors from content deemed harmful, such as material linked to mental health concerns, it also gives the Federal Trade Commission the authority to penalize companies over subjective definitions of what constitutes harm.
KOSA directs federal agencies to develop age verification systems at the device or operating system level, setting the stage for a national digital ID regime that would eliminate online anonymity and expose users to deeper tracking and data collection.
Despite revisions and corporate endorsements, the bill continues to raise alarms among civil liberties advocates who warn it would pressure platforms to over-censor, chilling free speech under the pretense of child safety.
Blackburn described platforms like Discord as enablers of predation, referencing the Kirk assassination, and asked Patel what Congress could do to give the FBI more power.
Patel responded with a call for financial crackdowns and more legal obligations for tech companies, stating, “Nobody’s being held accountable. They’re making money and our youth is dying.”
During his exchange with Rep. Brandon Gill, Patel made one of the most interesting comments of the hearing.
Patel called for expanding surveillance partnerships between the government and private tech companies, including gaming and social media platforms.
“There is no way to triage the amount of information generated on these sites by the FBI alone,” Patel said.
He advocated renewing a law that allows companies to report users to the FBI without fear of liability, framing this corporate-government alliance as essential to national security.
This approach would effectively deputize tech companies as enforcers. No concern was raised about how such partnerships could be abused to monitor lawful political activity or dissent.
Despite the repeated invocation of safety and child protection, the hearings presented little evidence that any of the proposed changes would meaningfully prevent crime.
Instead, lawmakers from both parties appeared eager to empower both the FBI and online platforms to act as gatekeepers of acceptable discourse, with Patel affirming at every turn that the Bureau would welcome such powers.
The push to overhaul Section 230, pass KOSA, and institutionalize surveillance under the banner of public-private “partnership” may signal a dangerous change in how speech is treated online.
Rather than protect fundamental rights, lawmakers are pushing to dissolve long-standing legal safeguards in pursuit of control over what people are allowed to say, and where they’re allowed to say it.
Max Blumenthal: Trump is afraid of Netanyahu – Israel spies on the US
If Americans Knew | September 18, 2025
Max Blumenthal is an American journalist and editor of The Grayzone.
Judge Andrew P. Napolitano is a graduate of Princeton University and the University of Notre Dame Law School. He is the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of New Jersey. He sat on the bench from 1987 to 1995, when he presided over more than 150 jury trials and thousands of motions, sentencings, and hearings. He is the author of nine books on the U.S. Constitution, two of which have been New York Times Best Sellers.
/ @judgingfreedom
Original video aired on Sept 15, 2025:
• [BREAKING NEWS EXCLUSIVE ] – Max Blumentha…
California governor set to sign bill restricting teaching of Palestinian history in schools
By Brooke Anderson | The New Arab | September 16, 2025
Rights advocates are raising concerns over what they say could be a troubling precedent if a bill is signed restricting the teaching of Palestinian history in classrooms in California.
The bill, AB 715, was voted through in the state’s Democratic-majority senate and assembly late Friday night and is now set to be signed by Governor Gavin Newsom.
Those opposing the measure have argued that it could stifle classroom discussions on Palestinians, Islamophobia and other sensitive topics; equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism; and make instructors vulnerable to complaints by imposing vague rules.
Over the last several months, it has faced strong opposition from more than 100 grassroots organisations, including the California Teachers Association, the California Faculty Association, California Federation of Teachers, Association of California School Administrators, California School Boards Association, California Nurses Association, and the American Civil Liberties Union. They have staged regular demonstrations at the state capitol in Sacramento.
Those supporting the bill include the Jewish Federation, the Jewish Community Relations Council, Mosaic United and the Anti-Defamation League. Though they were far fewer, they were able to exert more influence.
“They’re passing anti-education bills. The organising around it has been strong. The entire education community is against it, but it was still passed,” Mirvette Judeh, chair of the Arab American Caucus of the California Democratic Party, told The New Arab.
“They’re not listening to voters. This is a bill that’s unconstitutional. Today it’s education about Palestinian history. Tomorrow it could be something else. To punish teachers to teach about genocide is absolutely insane,” she said.
“History is history. It has to be taught. If people were taught about this in school, the mass dehumanisation of Palestinians would not be happening. They’re taking our rights here at home. This is your America. Take it back,” said Judeh, herself a Palestinian American.
So far, the governor has not indicated whether he will sign the bill, and civil rights advocates that oppose it are hoping there’s still a chance he will not sign it.
“Lawmakers heard overwhelming opposition—8 to 1 from public commenters—and warnings from their own colleagues about the bill’s chilling effect on education. Yet they advanced it anyway,” Hussam Ayloush, CEO of the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said in a public statement.
“This is now Governor Newsom’s test. He can either side with educators, civil rights advocates, and students whose voices are at risk of being silenced—or he can greenlight censorship that will make classrooms less free and less inclusive,” Ayloush added.
If signed, which could happen as early as this week, the bill’s supporters hope that it could be a blueprint for other states to pass similar legislation. This bill comes four years after the introduction in grade schools of ethnic studies, which have included material on Palestine, leading to controversy and the introduction of AB 715.
In other news related to free speech, a new bill introduced in Congress by Representative Brian Mast of Florida would allow Secretary of State Marco Rubio to strip immigrants of US citizenship if what they say is deemed to be terrorism. The move, which has been condemned by free speech advocates such as the ACLU, appears to be aimed at student activists.
